motiejus/stud
1
Fork 0
Code Releases Activity

restructuring

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Motiejus Jakštys 2020-06-18 11:12:25 +03:00
parent 76447a3682
commit 9901f5b01b
1 changed files with 8 additions and 6 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

14
II/Referatas/mj-referatas.tex
View File

@ -185,7 +185,7 @@ version will help explain some of the deficiencies in the reviewed algorithms.
\label{fig:crossing}
\end{figure}
\section{Comparison algorithms and parameters}
\subsection{Comparison algorithms and parameters}
\label{sec:algs-and-params}
To visually evaluate the Žeimena sample, examples for {\DP} and {\VW}
@ -204,11 +204,13 @@ value from the other, so the results are comparable?), {\DP} tolerance was
arbitrarily squared and fed to {\VW}. To author's eye, this provides comparable
and reasonable results, though could be researched.
Chaikin's smoothing algorithm was generated using $nIterations = 5$. That
number was chosen for better visual appeal at the expense of computational
power. Smaller number iterations would cause retain visible angles, whereas
larger number of iterations, like 5 (PostGIS supports values from 1 to 5),
causes the resulting lines to be very smooth.
Chaikin's smoothing algorithm was generated using $nIterations = 5$. Number of
iterations is a trade-off between visual appeal and required computational
power to execute the algorithm. PostGIS supports values between 1 and 5. Because
computational power for this analysis is not a concern, the maximum value was chosen,
making the resulting smoothened lines most visually appealing.
\subsection{Visual comparison results}
As can be observed in table~\ref{tab:comparison-zeimena} on
page~\pageref{tab:comparison-zeimena}, both simplification algorithms convert